Why do many Americans dislike the UN?

  • Thread starter Thread starter YoungIreland
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

YoungIreland

Guest
I am just curious since it has done much to ensure peace in the world for the last 65 years. I can see that it does support objectionable causes and of course this should be resisted. Yet I hear on LifeSiteNews and similar sites that the UN shouldn’t exist at all, that “world government” is evil when the Church has no objection to it. I would like to understand the reasoning behind these arguments agianst it from an American (and indeed any other country) perspective. Thanks.
 
Some people in the United States are concerned about the implications of ceding authority to a supranational organization. You may also hear similar arguments in relation to the WTO.
The arguments tend to revolve around issues of democracy and voice: Is it appropriate for a supranational organization to set policy or trump democratically created laws/policies?
 
The UN was supposed to end wars. In practice, it has given a soap box to numerous dictators, placing brutal dictatorships on “human rights committees” for example. It has failed to stop wars (Korea, Vietnam, genocides in Africa, Iraq, Afghanistan) and failed to resolve political questions (Israel/Palestine).

It is very political, and seeks to make itself more powerful than nations with many proposals for establishing laws and rights that would trump national laws. UN ambassadors are not elected, so such a system would be the death of democracy and the establishment of a one world government.

The UN seeks to silence political groups. There have been many meetings on issues where certain parties have been denied access or a voice because their views did not match the committee’s politics. This is extremely anti-democratic.

Many Christians predict the rise of one or more Anti-christ leaders before Christ’s return, and look at the anti-life and and anti-democratic policies of the UN as the building of such an Anti-christ world system.
 
UN promotes contraception and abortion around the world, they give billions of dollars it. They recently called contraception a human right

UN population fund (UNFPA) were given $50 million by Obama in 2009

Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte said in 2008:
UNFPA provides support for and participates in the management of the Chinese government’s program of coercive abortion and involuntary sterilization
Click to expand...
Congressman Chris Smith said in 2001
In March of this year the People’s Daily reported that Thoraya Ahmed Obaid, newly-appointed executive director of the United Nations Population Fund, “praised that over the past 20 years, China has seen notable achievements made in population control by implementing the family planning policy. It has thereupon played an active role in curbing the population growth across the world.” Imagine, the wholesale killing of millions of babies and the massive victimization of millions of women is deemed a “notable achievement” by the top UN population control bureaucrats. That seems to me to be breathtakingly cruel. Anyone who cares about human rights should be shocked
Click to expand...
 
During the civil war in El Salvador, I visited the country, which had a substantial UN presence. Where? Oceanfront country clubs. They were (and are) known as “Vacaciones Unidas” (United Vacations) by the Salvadorans.

What did the UN do during the genocide in Rwanda? They watched.
 
I am disgusted with this organization because it is costing the U.S. taxpayer some 22% of it’s budget. America is broke! Secondly, it has become a place where despots are treated as equals to the free nations of the world. Any organization that can put Iran on it’s “Human Rights” panels is not one that I would care to be associated with.

So, now the question I have for you is: What are your feelings towads this organization?
 
YoungIreland said:
I am just curious since it has done much to ensure peace in the world for the last 65 years. I can see that it does support objectionable causes and of course this should be resisted. Yet I hear on LifeSiteNews and similar sites that the UN shouldn’t exist at all, that “world government” is evil when the Church has no objection to it. I would like to understand the reasoning behind these arguments agianst it from an American (and indeed any other country) perspective. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Peace? What peace? :rolleyes:

Oh you mean when:

to condemn slavery in Sudan.failing


U.N. was trying to keep the peace in Sierra Leone.


The U.N. doing nothing during the massacre in Rwanda in 1994, where 800,000 were slaughtered?

Mugabe expunged all white farmers from Zimbabwe, and caused a famine and economic ruin?

UN asking Robert Mugabe to be UN Tourism Chief


They decried the US war in Iraq, claiming diplomacy and inspections are the only answer. At the same time, they refused to discuss the North Korea’s brazen moves.

U.N. ignored human rights abuses in Iran.

U.N. took over in East Timor, and then dropped the ball leading to further violence and anarchy.

Remember those Buddist statues in Afghanistan that the Taliban destroyed? Well, you guessed it. The U.N. failed to save them.

The U.N. failed to protect those displaced by a civil war in Angola.

The U.N. failed in Kashmir

The U.N. failed in Somalia.

The U.N. failed in Bosnia.

The U.N. failed in Israel.

The U.N. failed in Columbia.

The U. N. failed in Iraq.

Can someone name me something the UN successfully did, without the help of overwhelming US and UK/Commonwealth support? :rolleyes:
 
YoungIreland said:
I am just curious since it has done much to ensure peace in the world for the last 65 years. I can see that it does support objectionable causes and of course this should be resisted. Yet I hear on LifeSiteNews and similar sites that the UN shouldn’t exist at all, that “world government” is evil when the Church has no objection to it. I would like to understand the reasoning behind these arguments agianst it from an American (and indeed any other country) perspective. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Peace in the world? Surely you jest! They did nothing in Rwanda and stood by when thousands of men and boys were killed in Sebrenecia. UN troops were raping young girls in Africa and the UN pulled out of Indonesia leaving thousands of Tamil civilians to the mercies of the Indonesian Army. The UN is a joke as far as I am concerned.
 
The far right has opposed the UN for years, at least since the John Birch society put out the bumper stickers that had “US out of the UN”.

ISTM that many who oppose the UN are not really interested in world peace, and want the world at beck and call to the US.

I don’t think that is realistic nowadays as recent events show.

What is wrong with children having rights, my very right leaning step Dad regarded his wife and children as his chattels, to do with as he pleased, his abuse including breaking my left leg with his bare hands when I was only 9 yo was constant. Verbal too he was telling me daily how “worthless” I am.

He died from lung cancer when he was only 36 years old, and I still pray for his soul.
 
In a nutshell, we are paying a good chunk of change to belong to an organization comprised mostly of members that hate our guts.

Blech and phooey on the UN. 🙂
 
andrewstx said:
The far right has opposed the UN for years, at least since the John Birch society put out the bumper stickers that had “US out of the UN”.

ISTM that many who oppose the UN are not really interested in world peace, and want the world at beck and call to the US.

I don’t think that is realistic nowadays as recent events show.

What is wrong with children having rights, my very right leaning step Dad regarded his wife and children as his chattels, to do with as he pleased, his abuse including breaking my left leg with his bare hands when I was only 9 yo was constant. Verbal too he was telling me daily how “worthless” I am.

He died from lung cancer when he was only 36 years old, and I still pray for his soul.
Click to expand...
What does your abusive step dad have to do with the UN?

So because your step dad was an abusive, that means we should support the UN, which protects some of the most abusive and murderous people around? :ehh:
 
The UN cannot stop genocide when it occurs. It cannot even get approval of a resolution to disapprove of genocide when it occurs. The Secretary General even directed the head of a UN “Peacekeeping” force to stand down and take no action to prevent genocide that was imminent. What makes anyone think that it could be effective in enforcing children’s rights or anyone’s rights? It won’t even eject nations who blatantly violate its charter.
 
Like all politics when the system goes from freedom of ought meaning you do the right thing and vote virtuously to freedom from not meaning you vote for what you want at the expense of others, the system is broken.
 
andrewstx said:
What is wrong with children having rights
Click to expand...
From the above link:
Ten things you need to know about the substance of the CRC:
Click to expand...
  • Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.13.
  • The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent’s decision.14.
  • A child’s “right to be heard” would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.15.
  • According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children’s welfare.16.
  • Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.17.
  • Christian schools that refuse to teach “alternative worldviews” and teach that Christianity is the only true religion “fly in the face of article 29” of the treaty.18.
  • Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.19.
  • Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.20.
  • Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.11.
  • A murderer aged 17 years and 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.12.
Click to expand...
What the UN means when it says “rights of children” flies in the face of what many (if not most) of us mean.
 
JimG said:
The UN cannot stop genocide when it occurs. It cannot even get approval of a resolution to disapprove of genocide when it occurs. The Secretary General even directed the head of a UN “Peacekeeping” force to stand down and take no action to prevent genocide that was imminent. What makes anyone think that it could be effective in enforcing children’s rights or anyone’s rights? It won’t even eject nations who blatantly violate its charter.
Click to expand...
Wasn’t SYRIA (yeah, that Syria) on the security council? It is not now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top